G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Marywarfield’s statement makes perfect sense. I understood her post.
Can it be answered?
- Status
Can it be answered?
S
spina1953
Guest
Hi Ryan Black: I agree that one who lives in glass housed not to throw stones, and I do know that there are plenty of Catholic’s that have pride that they not need. I will stick around as I do want to try and understand the Trinity better. Yet, I am compelled to think that while the Son is begotten from the Father and the Holy Spirit does indeed come from the Father, Does not the Father and Son somehow share the Holy Spirit? even though the Holy Spirit is separate and distinct? The Son does the will of the Father so would not then the Holy Spirit give the truth of not just the Father but also the Word which is the Son?
R
RyanBlack
Guest
Do the Father and the Spirit not somehow share the Son?
J
jshalom
Guest
His explanation was that the procession from the Father through the Son was the Orthodox way of interpreting it and through the Father and the Son was the roman-latin way and that he thought the orthodox way explained things better. The problem was not on the doctrine but on the rift produced with the separation from the Pope. Anyhow we did not dwell into the subject because it was in European Culture Module.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
You didn’t answer marywarfield’s question?
Originally Posted by marywarfield View Post
Well I think if we say the Spirit proceeds from ONLY the
Father and not the Son we in effect deny the Son is
the Word don’t we?
The filioque never denies the professed “Consubstantiality” of the Trinity. as you implied; Here is proof;
CCC 248b = The Western Tradition expresses first the **Consubstantial **communion between the Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque).
It says this, "legitimately and with good reason, " for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as “principle without principle,” is the first origin the Spirit, but also that as Father of the Only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.
Legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.
That is a heresy to believe such a thing; No Catholic pretends to believe that the Son is begotten by both the Father and the Spirit.
The Father who begets the Only begotten Son, this eternal procession, never denies the divinity or dignity of the Spirit in the begetting and the begotten. That is why it is never debated or protested, it is a divine revelation of Jesus Christ.
marywarfield’s question is related to this profession of faith; Can you answer her question?
In the begetting from the Father in the Only begotten Son, where is the Spirit, she asked?
If the Spirit only proceeds from the Father and not the Son? You make the Son a creature in the only begotten of the Father. As mary put it; "Welll I think if we say the Spirit proceeds from ONLY the
Father and not the Son we in effect deny the Son is
the Word don’t we?"
Can you clear this up?
In reality, marywarfield’s statement is so simple yet most profound
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Oh, thank you for that explanation; So it was an opinion of your instructor, that makes the difference.
Can you share any insights here, you may have? of the eternal procession of the Spirit proceeding from the Father through the Son and the difference of the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son?
A slight correction is needed to your Latin view comment; We don’t profess that the Spirit proceeds through the Father and the Son. We profess the Spirit proceeds FROM the Father and the Son.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
How so RyanBlack? when the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father and the Spirit is not the Son. Do we not profess that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons in the blessed Trinity? It’s an easy question to answer for you.
J
jshalom
Guest
The question is too complicated for me. Many people do not like wikipedia but it has got an excelent and balanced explanation that I would recommend. Filioque. The Vatican accepts both versions (John Paul II Audience. The Orthodox do not accept the “filioque” ( The OrthodoxOh, thank you for that explanation; So it was an opinion of your instructor, that makes the difference.
Can you share any insights here, you may have? of the eternal procession of the Spirit proceeding from the Father through the Son and the difference of the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son?
A slight correction is needed to your Latin view comment; We don’t profess that the Spirit proceeds through the Father and the Son. We profess the Spirit proceeds FROM the Father and the Son.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Your right I am one of those who do not like Wikipedia, it has the filioque pronounced in the 6th century when a pope proclaimed it long before in the 5th century. It is loose in facts but it gets to the discussion of a subject.
Thanks for the sites, they have a wealth of information, especially JPII commentary on the procession. I do not know if you read through it? but JPII answered our question here, thanks.
JPII has the eternal procession starting from the Father through the Son and profoundly takes us into the mystery of the Trinity much deeper when he speaks of the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
When it is professed the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, this is in keeping with the eternal procession. When God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, this never takes away from the eternal procession, but reveals a deeper revelation of God revealing Himself in the Trinity of persons eternally but made known in space and time.
The procession of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son is in keeping with the eternal procession, with the filioque we enter into God’s profound mysteries much more in a greater mystical sense, that reveals God making revelations to our humanity and in all of creation in space an time.
In other words when we profess the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, God reveals the fulfillment of His Word through the Incarnate Son. This procession says it all.
The filioque never takes away from the eternal procession of the Spirit proceeding eternally from the Father through the Son, no one discounts this procession, because it remains eternally.
The filioque makes known the eternal fulfillment of the eternal procession made known by the Lord the giver of Life in space and time. The filioque reveals that For which the Father begets the Son and sends the Holy Spirit , who eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son.
So I would disagree with your “teacher at University” opinon in regards to the eternal procession. “That it is more better”, when there is no difference in the eternal procession, the difference is the distinction of persons eternally proceeds, revealing God in space and time, when professed from the Nicene Creed that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
peace be with you
Does your teacher have a website? Just kidding
R
Richca
Guest
hello gabriel,Oh, thank you for that explanation; So it was an opinion of your instructor, that makes the difference.
Can you share any insights here, you may have? of the eternal procession of the Spirit proceeding from the Father through the Son and the difference of the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son?
A slight correction is needed to your Latin view comment; We don’t profess that the Spirit proceeds through the Father and the Son. We profess the Spirit proceeds FROM the Father and the Son.
According to Catholic faith, the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son or from the Father through the Son means the same thing, i.e., the communication of the divine nature to the Holy Spirit comes from both the Father and the Son.
The CCC#248 says " At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father’s character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he “who proceeds from the Father”, it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son." The Eastern tradition expresses the Father as the origin and principle of the Trinity which undoubtably He is and so the greek fathers like to say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father as the first origin or principle of the Spirit and through the Son as a mediate origin or principle. The divine nature is communicated from the Father through or to the Son, for the Son receives the divine nature from the Father, to the Holy Spirit.
The CCC#248 continues “The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, “legitimately and with good reason”, for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as “the principle without principle”, is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.” As the text says, the Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between the Father and Son, and from this communion the divine nature is communicated to the Holy Spirit by the Father and Son as from a single principle.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Amen, I could not have said any better than you have.
Question?
If the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son.
When is this eternal procession revealed, when Jesus fully human fully divine walks the earth in space and time? That is what my commentary is addressing.
I would welcome your take on such a subject of the eternal procession or any references;
Thank you
R
Richca
Guest
hello gabriel,Amen, I could not have said any better than you have.
Question?
If the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son.
When is this eternal procession revealed, when Jesus fully human fully divine walks the earth in space and time? That is what my commentary is addressing.
I would welcome your take on such a subject of the eternal procession or any references;
Thank you
The mystery of the Trinity was not fully revealed until the incarnation of the Son of God and the sending of the Holy Spirit. The CCC#237 states:
“The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the “mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God”.58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel’s faith before the Incarnation of God’s Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.”
I would invite you to read what the CCC says about the revelation of God as Trinity starting with #232 through #267.
S
spina1953
Guest
I agree with both Gabriel of 12 and Richca as to your posts and the explanations is what I understand from CCC. In my post on the subject I was trying to get the Orthodox to respond as to how they understand the trinity since they always it seems on threads I have read that they do not and will agree to the filioque.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Can’t go wrong with the CCC. Richca, although the CCC deals directly with the doctrine of the Trinity and the filioque in the paragraphs you listed.
Provided that the filioque has been accepted by the posters here, I was hoping to set apart from the expressed doctrine and enter into each ones theological understandings of the eternal procession of the Trinity of persons and how one can express the procession theologically with the understanding that the doctrine of the filioque is already understood and accepted.
Can anyone give an example or expression of the Holy Spirit proceeding eternally from the Father and the Son that is revealed in space and time?
peace be with you
I
C
coptsoldier
Guest
Double procession is not catholic faith. The holy spirit eternally proceeds from the father, sent through the son
M
marywarfield
Guest
Well thank you Gabriel. But in truth the reason I disagree
with the Orthodox view is the Prologue to John.
Reading the Prologue it is obvious John believes in
the consubstantiality of Father and Son but he strongly
makes the point that it is from the WORD we have
received grace upon grace from HIS Fullness.
1
In the beginning* was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.a
2
He was in the beginning with God.
3
- All things came to be through him,
and without him nothing came to be.b
What came to be
4
through him was life,
and this life was the light of the human race;c
5 - the light shines in the darkness,d
and the darkness has not overcome it.
6 - A man named John was sent from God.e
7
He came for testimony,* to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him.f
8
He was not the light, but came to testify to the light.g
9
The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.h
10
He was in the world,
and the world came to be through him,
but the world did not know him.
11
He came to what was his own,
but his own people* did not accept him.
12
i But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in his name,
13 - j who were born not by natural generation nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision but of God.
14
And the Word became flesh*
and made his dwelling among us,
and we saw his glory,
the glory as of the Father’s only Son,
full of grace and truth.k
15 - John testified to him and cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said,l ‘The one who is coming after me ranks ahead of me because he existed before me.’”
16
From his fullness we have all received, grace in place of grace,*
17
because while the law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
W
Wandile
Guest
I’ve come up with an analogy to explain the filioque. Opinions on it are welcomed
Filioque is this :
[In some crazy world where water systems work like this] There are three components to this system namely The Sea, The Rivers and The Ponds. Now the Sea (Father) is the ultimate source of all water(Divinity). The water in the sea is not fixated in the sea but flows to the rivers and ponds. How this happens is that the water(Divinity) flows from the seas into the rivers (Son). The rivers then in turn allow for the water to flow to the ponds (Holy Spirit). Now it can be said that the source of the water in the pond is the sea. This is true as all water in this system finds its ultimate origin/source in the sea. However it can also be said that the water in the pond finds its source from the river because without the river, the water from the sea could not reach the pond. It is from the river that the pond receives its water. Thus it is true to say the water in the pond is from the sea and the river. The sea and the river are both components in the flow (Spiration) of water and thus they are one principal from which the pond received its water.
Filioque is this :
[In some crazy world where water systems work like this] There are three components to this system namely The Sea, The Rivers and The Ponds. Now the Sea (Father) is the ultimate source of all water(Divinity). The water in the sea is not fixated in the sea but flows to the rivers and ponds. How this happens is that the water(Divinity) flows from the seas into the rivers (Son). The rivers then in turn allow for the water to flow to the ponds (Holy Spirit). Now it can be said that the source of the water in the pond is the sea. This is true as all water in this system finds its ultimate origin/source in the sea. However it can also be said that the water in the pond finds its source from the river because without the river, the water from the sea could not reach the pond. It is from the river that the pond receives its water. Thus it is true to say the water in the pond is from the sea and the river. The sea and the river are both components in the flow (Spiration) of water and thus they are one principal from which the pond received its water.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Understood; We are not talking Double procession here; How is the eternal procession of the Trinity **made known **in space and time?
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Yes I gathered that in addition to the creation week when God speaks and sends His Word.
When the Word is God and the Word became flesh. How is the eternal procession revealed? Your question was; If the Spirit ONLY proceeds from the Father and NOT the Son, that procession only from the Father would make the begotten Son not the Word, and divides the blessed Trinity, making the Son a creature of God.
When we profess the consubstantiation of all three persons of the blessed Trinity.
The question is still not answered in my view, Has it been answered in your view, from the Orthodox?
J
jshalom
Guest
No, my teacher at a Catholic University has died already. The best teacher I ever had.Your right I am one of those who do not like Wikipedia, it has the filioque pronounced in the 6th century when a pope proclaimed it long before in the 5th century. It is loose in facts but it gets to the discussion of a subject.
Thanks for the sites, they have a wealth of information, especially JPII commentary on the procession. I do not know if you read through it? but JPII answered our question here, thanks.
JPII has the eternal procession starting from the Father through the Son and profoundly takes us into the mystery of the Trinity much deeper when he speaks of the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
When it is professed the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, this is in keeping with the eternal procession. When God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, this never takes away from the eternal procession, but reveals a deeper revelation of God revealing Himself in the Trinity of persons eternally but made known in space and time.
The procession of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son is in keeping with the eternal procession, with the filioque we enter into God’s profound mysteries much more in a greater mystical sense, that reveals God making revelations to our humanity and in all of creation in space an time.
In other words when we profess the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, God reveals the fulfillment of His Word through the Incarnate Son. This procession says it all.
The filioque never takes away from the eternal procession of the Spirit proceeding eternally from the Father through the Son, no one discounts this procession, because it remains eternally.
The filioque makes known the eternal fulfillment of the eternal procession made known by the Lord the giver of Life in space and time. The filioque reveals that For which the Father begets the Son and sends the Holy Spirit , who eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son.
So I would disagree with your “teacher at University” opinon in regards to the eternal procession. “That it is more better”, when there is no difference in the eternal procession, the difference is the distinction of persons eternally proceeds, revealing God in space and time, when professed from the Nicene Creed that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
peace be with you
Does your teacher have a website? Just kidding
Yes, wikipedia is full of errors but all in all, provides an introduction to subjects.
I read the articles. I have read the subject for the 5th or 6th time. It is a question that on and off comes into my way. The other day was discussing this in Internet with a crazy greek who hated catholics all because of the “filioque”.
This is a subject that makes me sad. Unlike the Reformation, which touched many subjects and made a profound revolution, this is such a small topic and I am sad to see christians divided because of that. Moreover, because of the opening of Russia, there will be fights among the orthodox who think the catholic are invading their private domain and the Catholic Church. This when we could be all together against atheism.
Jesus, Son of God, make us one flock under your guidance !
- Status